[NNTP] Extensions drafts

[Russ Allbery]

Ken Murchison <ken at oceana.com> writes:

> I was sent a message offline about the fact that the extension drafts
> discuss some of the generic responses (namely 480, 483, 504), but don't
> list them in the formal syntax/response sections.  I realize that these
> responses are valid for *any* command, but I can see the point that
> since we're outside of the base document that they it may be worth
> listing them as valid responses and mentioning that they are defined in
> the base doc.  Thoughts?

I think we talked a bit about this at some point in the past.  Personally,
I'd rather not duplicate information already in the base document, since
if the base document adds more generic return codes at some point in the
future for some reason, it's just more places to update.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>